Anyone made a Ranger using the Natural Weapon combat style? I like the idea of a character that uses natural weapons but this seems unbalanced. Strong for the first 6 levels and weak after 9th level when a Ranger gets 3 attacks.
Any opinions on this?
Ideas to make it on par with weapon wielding Rangers at mid-high levels?
I thought a 2 level dip into Barbarian to get a Bite attack might help but then he's missing out on two levels of Rangeryness.
|
Anyone made a Ranger using the Natural Weapon combat style? I like the idea of a character that uses natural weapons but this seems unbalanced. Strong for the first 6 levels and weak after 9th level when a Ranger gets 3 attacks.
Any opinions on this?
Ideas to make it on par with weapon wielding Rangers at mid-high levels?I thought a 2 level dip into Barbarian to get a Bite attack might help but then he's missing out on two levels of Rangeryness.
If you play a Half-Orc, they have an alternate racial trait called Toothy that gives a bite attack (it replaces the orc ferocity racial trait). It's a primary natural attack (not sure, but I thought the Barbarian Rage power was secondary -- not near my rulebooks right now). Plus, you wouldn't have to give up Ranger levels. If your GM doesn't allow alternate racial traits, there's a feat called Razortusk that grants a Half-Orc a bite attack, but I think it's a secondary attack, also.
It is the fighter natural weapon variant that makes even less sense, all the bonuses for natural attacks it doesn't give you.
As for the ranger, you can go half-orc to get a bite attack and still keep up after 9th, a fourth attack is harder to come by though
Edit: Ninja'd
So assuming a medium sized Ranger and you manage to get a bite attack out of a racial trait, you're getting two 1d6 attacks at full bab plus one 1d4 at -5. You can get all this at first level.
1d6(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d6(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d4(-5 atk, 1/2 str bonus)
At second level you can take Improved Natural Attack(claws) and be doing 1d8(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d8(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d4(-5 atk, 1/2 str bonus)
At 3rd level you can take Improved Natural Attack(bite) and be doing 1d8(full BAB, Str bonus)/1d8(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d6(-5 atk, 1/2 str bonus)
At 6th level can take Rending Claw to do 1d8(full BAB, Str bonus)/1d8(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d6(-5 atk, 1/2 str bonus)/1d6
A TWF Ranger can get 1d8(-2 atk, full str bonus)/1d6(-2 atk, 1/2 str bonus) at first level.
Second level if he takes double slice can get 1d8(-2 atk, full str bonus)/1d6(-2 atk, full str bonus)
He's still behind at 6th level if he takes Improved TWF because he's probably not hitting much with his. Now he gets
1d8(-2 atk, full str bonus)/1d8(-7 atk, full str bonus)/1d6(-2 atk, full str bonus)/1d6(-7 atk, full str bonus)
I think the TWF will catch up at about 10th level when he gets Greater TWF and then will continue to get better while the Natural Weapon one stagnates.
If you're only using natural weapons, I suppose Eldritch Claws becomes a necessity.
|
|
So assuming a medium sized Ranger and you manage to get a bite attack out of a racial trait, you're getting two 1d6 attacks at full bab plus one 1d4 at -5. You can get all this at first level.
1d6(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d6(full BAB, full Str bonus)/1d4(-5 atk, 1/2 str bonus)
Actually, the Toothy racial trait specifies that it is a primary natural attack. So, it wouldn't take -5 (unless I'm missing something...)
Not sure where the d6 claws are coming from either half orcs don't have claws and the style does not grant them.
You can get them at level 2 with aspect of the beast but they only do a d4 damage.
Still 3 attacks at 1d4 +str mod isn't bad especially with power attack and as you have 3 natural attacks you can qualify for multiattack so at higher levels can use a 1 handed weapon with a claw and bite secondary attack.
For instance a level 6 ranger with an 18 strength power attack, and no magic would be able to with multi attack
Melee longsword +8/+3 (1d8+8), a claw +6 (1d4+4)and bite +6(1d4+4
or with improved natural attack
2 claws +8 (1d6+8), bite +8 (1d4+8).
Not sure where the d6 claws are coming from either half orcs don't have claws and the style does not grant them.
You can get them at level 2 with aspect of the beast but they only do a d4 damage.
Still 3 attacks at 1d4 +str mod isn't bad especially with power attack and as you have 3 natural attacks you can qualify for multiattack so at higher levels can use a 1 handed weapon with a claw and bite secondary attack.
For instance a level 6 ranger with an 18 strength power attack, and no magic would be able to with multi attack
Melee longsword +8/+3 (1d8+8), a claw +6 (1d4+4)and bite +6(1d4+4
or with improved natural attack
2 claws +8 (1d6+8), bite +8 (1d4+8).
Wouldn't it be:
Melee longsword +8/+3 (1d8+8), claw +3 (1d4+4), bite +3 (1d4+4); or
2 claws +10, bite +10.
Once you attack with a manufactured weapon, all natural attacks are considered secondary.
Not sure where the d6 claws are coming from either half orcs don't have claws and the style does not grant them.
You can get them at level 2 with aspect of the beast but they only do a d4 damage.
Still 3 attacks at 1d4 +str mod isn't bad especially with power attack and as you have 3 natural attacks you can qualify for multiattack so at higher levels can use a 1 handed weapon with a claw and bite secondary attack.
For instance a level 6 ranger with an 18 strength power attack, and no magic would be able to with multi attack
Melee longsword +8/+3 (1d8+8), a claw +6 (1d4+4)and bite +6(1d4+4
or with improved natural attack
2 claws +8 (1d6+8), bite +8 (1d4+8).
Wouldn't it be:
Melee longsword +8/+3 (1d8+8), claw +3 (1d4+4), bite +3 (1d4+4); or
2 claws +10, bite +10.
Once you attack with a manufactured weapon, all natural attacks are considered secondary.
I factored in the multiattack feat with the weapon set without it you would be correct.
The Claws and bite would be +8 due to the -2 for power attack.
the ranger needs to be second level to get the claws
Not sure where the d6 claws are coming from either half orcs don't have claws and the style does not grant them.
You can get them at level 2 with aspect of the beast but they only do a d4 damage.
Still 3 attacks at 1d4 +str mod isn't bad especially with power attack and as you have 3 natural attacks you can qualify for multiattack so at higher levels can use a 1 handed weapon with a claw and bite secondary attack.
For instance a level 6 ranger with an 18 strength power attack, and no magic would be able to with multi attack
Melee longsword +8/+3 (1d8+8), a claw +6 (1d4+4)and bite +6(1d4+4
or with improved natural attack
2 claws +8 (1d6+8), bite +8 (1d4+8).
Oh yeah sorry. Late and wife was rushing me. It should be 1d4 not a 1d6.
So drop the die on the Claw attacks by one.
the ranger needs to be second level to get the claws
Oh yeah you're right. When I read the feat I interpreted the Special part as the Ranger would be able to take it without meeting the prereqs but I suppose he would actually have to be 2nd level to choose his combat style.
So anyone think of a way for the Natural Weapon user to be effective at higher levels without using a weapon? BAB doesn't give him any extra attacks with his Natural Weapons so he kind of just stagnates with claw/claw/bite at full BAB (since, as heymitch pointed out, toothy grants the bite as a primary attack).
With Aspect of the Beast, Improved Natural Attack(claws), Improved Natural Attack(Bite), and Rending Claws. Wouldn't even need multiattack unless he planned on using weapons.
At 6th level he ends up with 1d6+str/1d6+str/1d6+str (all at full BAB) and if both claws hit he gets an additional 1d6 from Rending Claws. So really pretty powerful at that point.
However, he has peaked (at 6th level!). His damage stops progressing. There's nothing else to take unless he can somehow get another natural attack (like a Gore) or increase the die of the ones he has so he has to start using manufactured weapons which seems to defeat the entire concept of focusing on natural weapons.
The big difference is that while someone can get 3 attacks with BAB at 11, the double claw ranger is getting 2 at full BAB, not BAB & BAB - 5. It's a trade off, you're trading more damage output for surer damage application.
For example, if you had an 11 ranger with claw/claw, Imp Nat Attack Bite and Claw (which I believe is 1d6/1d6 if I read the above correctly) and an Amulet of Might Fists (Flaming, Acidic), then the ranger would be doing :
1d6 + 1d6 Acid + 1d6 Fire + STR at 11+STR to hit, twice.
A fighter with TWF might have a falchion with flaming and acidic as well for about the same cost. So he'd have 12+STR to hit, and 3 attacks.
Assume AC of 24 for the vict... er, enemy.
If we assume 10 str for both (to simplify math) then :
Ranger = 3.5+3.5+3.5 = 11hp * 40% (Chance to hit) = 4hp (x2 for 2 claws) = 8hp
Fighter =
1st Attack : 2.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 + 1 = 11hp * 45% (Chance to hit) = 4hp
2nd Attack : 2.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 + 1 = 11hp * 20% (Chance to hit) = 2hp
3rd Attack : 2.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 + 1 = 11hp * 5% (Chance to hit) = 1hp
Total : 7hp
So the ranger is doing slightly better with his two natural claws. Now, you can of course spend feats and other abilities to increase the fighter, or choose a different weapon, but this illustrates the point that given equal stats, the two-claw ranger is viable at mid levels. The big one would be the fighter has the extra feats to really boost his output. A natural weapon fighter, on the other hand, has more problems. He has to meet the requirements for the Aspect of the Beast feat, unlike the ranger. So he's kind of hosed, even though he has more feats to play with.
If you go TWF with the fighter, his DPR goes up obviously, but he's spending way more feats to get the same bang for the buck (granted, he has more feats), so again, it's balancing out some.
As a note, I actually played an urban ranger catfolk with dual claw attacks in a game about 6 months ago. It was VERY effective at 5th level. I also had the option of carrying a couple of different AoMFs on me with different special bonuses such as acid or fire etc, so I had a much more versatile approach to combat. The ability to add +1 or +2 worth of bonuses to both claw attacks (and the bite if I'd taken a feat) was worth a bit of loss on the DPR loss. A TWF has to enchant each weapon individually, and if he wants to carry around multiples, it takes encumbrance and expense. The +1 and +2 AoMFs are relatively inexpensive, and affect all natural weapons at once.
The big difference is that while someone can get 3 attacks with BAB at 11, the double claw ranger is getting 2 at full BAB, not BAB & BAB - 5. It's a trade off, you're trading more damage output for surer damage application.
For example, if you had an 11 ranger with claw/claw, Imp Nat Attack Bite and Claw (which I believe is 1d6/1d6 if I read the above correctly) and an Amulet of Might Fists (Flaming, Acidic), then the ranger would be doing :
1d6 + 1d6 Acid + 1d6 Fire + STR at 11+STR to hit, twice.
A fighter with TWF might have a falchion with flaming and acidic as well for about the same cost. So he'd have 12+STR to hit, and 3 attacks.
Assume AC of 24 for the vict... er, enemy.
If we assume 10 str for both (to simplify math) then :
Ranger = 3.5+3.5+3.5 = 11hp * 40% (Chance to hit) = 4hp (x2 for 2 claws) = 8hp
Fighter =
1st Attack : 2.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 + 1 = 11hp * 45% (Chance to hit) = 4hp
2nd Attack : 2.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 + 1 = 11hp * 20% (Chance to hit) = 2hp
3rd Attack : 2.5 + 3.5 + 3.5 + 1 = 11hp * 5% (Chance to hit) = 1hp
Total : 7hpSo the ranger is doing slightly better with his two natural claws. Now, you can of course spend feats and other abilities to increase the fighter, or choose a different weapon, but this illustrates the point that given equal stats, the two-claw ranger is viable at mid levels. The big one would be the fighter has the extra feats to really boost his output. A natural weapon fighter, on the other hand, has more problems. He has to meet the requirements for the Aspect of the Beast feat, unlike the ranger. So he's kind of hosed, even though he has more feats to play with.
If you go TWF with the fighter, his DPR goes up obviously, but he's spending way more feats to get the same bang for the buck (granted, he has more feats), so again, it's balancing out some.
As a note, I actually played an urban ranger catfolk with dual claw attacks in a game about 6 months ago. It was VERY effective at 5th level. I also had the option of carrying a couple...
Thanks for that mdt.
I can totally see how the Natural Weapon Ranger has better output at low levels (it actually might be OP at low levels) and it appears that it's comparable at middle levels. However, how does that compare at high levels when the Fighter (or Other Style Ranger) is getting 4 attacks per round?Assuming the Fighter and The Natural Weapon Ranger have access to equivalent magic, the NWR's damage output hasn't changed (relative to the Fighter's) since 6th level. Only thing that changes is his chance to hit. How would you keep his damage up to par after 15th level? It seems the NWR would still be the same while the Fighter finally passes him, leaving the NWR a suboptimal choice at the higher levels unless there's some way to get him one more attack or increase his damage die another step.
I'm not sure if I follow the point. Yes NWR has advantages early on, then lags a bit behind later. If you run the actual numbers, you'll see that the NWR is maybe 10 to 20% behind at very high levels. This is not bad at all. Comparing pure DPR vs a fighter is a nasty thing - fighters job description is to hit often and for much damage.
I'm not sure if I follow the point. Yes NWR has advantages early on, then lags a bit behind later. If you run the actual numbers, you'll see that the NWR is maybe 10 to 20% behind at very high levels. This is not bad at all. Comparing pure DPR vs a fighter is a nasty thing - fighters job description is to hit often and for much damage.
I'm really more interested in comparing it to the other Ranger lines. Lagging 10-20% behind the other melee builds (without some tactical advantage to make up for it) at high levels when your job is to melee is a significant build flaw.
From what's available it seems like, if you want to play a melee Ranger, you'd be crazy not to want to play the NWR at low levels and would probably want to retire him at 15th in favor of a weapons oriented melee style.What I want to do, is figure out if there is a way to keep the style comparable at high levels.
What about focusing on Grapples at high levels? Could still use his natural attacks while grappling and as long as someone is around to make him bigger he could still grapple big foes.
I'm not sure if I follow the point. Yes NWR has advantages early on, then lags a bit behind later. If you run the actual numbers, you'll see that the NWR is maybe 10 to 20% behind at very high levels. This is not bad at all. Comparing pure DPR vs a fighter is a nasty thing - fighters job description is to hit often and for much damage.
I'm really more interested in comparing it to the other Ranger lines. Lagging 10-20% behind the other melee builds (without some tactical advantage to make up for it) at high levels when your job is to melee is a significant build flaw.
From what's available it seems like, if you want to play a melee Ranger, you'd be crazy not to want to play the NWR at low levels and would probably want to retire him at 15th in favor of a weapons oriented melee style.What I want to do, is figure out if there is a way to keep the style comparable at high levels.
What about focusing on Grapples at high levels? Could still use his natural attacks while grappling and as long as someone is around to make him bigger he could still grapple big foes.
You dont need to be bigger to grapple anymore, that limitation is only on grab
You dont need to be bigger to grapple anymore, that limitation is only on grabI'm not sure if I follow the point. Yes NWR has advantages early on, then lags a bit behind later. If you run the actual numbers, you'll see that the NWR is maybe 10 to 20% behind at very high levels. This is not bad at all. Comparing pure DPR vs a fighter is a nasty thing - fighters job description is to hit often and for much damage.
I'm really more interested in comparing it to the other Ranger lines. Lagging 10-20% behind the other melee builds (without some tactical advantage to make up for it) at high levels when your job is to melee is a significant build flaw.
From what's available it seems like, if you want to play a melee Ranger, you'd be crazy not to want to play the NWR at low levels and would probably want to retire him at 15th in favor of a weapons oriented melee style.What I want to do, is figure out if there is a way to keep the style comparable at high levels.
What about focusing on Grapples at high levels? Could still use his natural attacks while grappling and as long as someone is around to make him bigger he could still grapple big foes.
Now I'm just trying to picture a 6 ft. tall 200 lbs human grappling, and attempting to pin, a 20ft long dragon. :D
At high levels it might be worthwhile to be invested in iterative combat maneuvers (disarm, sunder and trip) - since they can be used in place of melee attacks (rather than as a standard action). That means that you can have 3 (full BAB) maneuver attempts to disarm/sunder/or/trip. That is pretty good.
At high levels it might be worthwhile to be invested in iterative combat maneuvers (disarm, sunder and trip) - since they can be used in place of melee attacks (rather than as a standard action). That means that you can have 3 (full BAB) maneuver attempts to disarm/sunder/or/trip. That is pretty good.
Hmmm. NWR that just tears things up at low levels and then gets more tactical, focusing on trips and grapples at higher levels. This could work. :)
Lockjaw improves your Natural Attack and gives it the Grab property,
letting you do regular attacks and throw in a Grapple on top of the damage.
(technically, I imagine you could do a Cleave and Grapple multiple foes)
Technically, you can avoid taking almost all the Natural Weapon Feats, and take Weapon Focus (not specified to Nat Weapons only), Vital Strike, and possibly Imp. Nat. Attack for Nat. Weapons you acquire otherwise (e.g. Half-Orc Bite) and Multi-Attack. In any case, it isn´t really hard to pick up a Greatsword/Falchion/Scimitar and do alot of damage with it, there isn´t really a big Feat investment needed for basic 2-hander melee damage, which you can throw any non-claw Nat Attacks on top of.
Some weapon options not yet mentioned is Armor Spikes or Unarmed Strike (possibly from a Monk level) which wouldn´t interfere with full use of Natural Weapons (though you couldn´t Flurry in combo w/ Nat Weapons). UAS is doubly nice, because it benefits from the same Amulet of Mighty Fists/Magic Fang that you will use for the rest of your Natural Attacks, AND if you are getting it from a Monk dip there is signifigant WISDOM synergy. Guided Weapon property on the Amulet really lets you focus on WIS, though that isn´t PFS-legal and really works best when starting at mid-levels, not 1st level (unless you´re a Cleric/Druid).
IMHO, the Shapeshifter variant didn´t go far enough - it should really have given up MORE Ranger abilities, like Favored Enemy for one, and gained REAL Wildshape progression. As is, there is NO scaling in the abilities it gives, just getting to use the same bonuses two at a time and more often... until you reach 20th level, when you actually get something like Wildshape.
Sunder ISN´T in place of ANY melee attack - it specifically uses the Attack action, so no Iteratives.
(the wording can be confusing because it does use the phrase ´in place of the melee attack´, but that in reference to the Attack Action´s melee attack which it replaces)
I swear, Paizo should send me collectable buttons or something for every time I point this out here ;-P
Sundering Crit is an option to allow free Sunders on Iteratives/AoO´s/etc.
Nat Weapons probably aren´t optimal for triggering Crit effects, but if you´re using them in combo with a Scimitar/Falchion, it could certainly work decently (though since Nat Weapons also don´t have the highest damage, they are less likely to actually destroy whatever you want to destroy).
Lockjaw improves your Natural Attack and gives it the Grab property,
letting you do regular attacks and throw in a Grapple on top of the damage.
(technically, I imagine you could do a Cleave and Grapple multiple foes)Technically, you can avoid taking almost all the Natural Weapon Feats, and take Weapon Focus (not specified to Nat Weapons only), Vital Strike, and possibly Imp. Nat. Attack for Nat. Weapons you acquire otherwise (e.g. Half-Orc Bite) and Multi-Attack. In any case, it isn´t really hard to pick up a Greatsword/Falchion/Scimitar and do alot of damage with it, there isn´t really a big Feat investment needed for basic 2-hander melee damage, which you can throw any non-claw Nat Attacks on top of.
Some weapon options not yet mentioned is Armor Spikes or Unarmed Strike (possibly from a Monk level) which wouldn´t interfere with full use of Natural Weapons (though you couldn´t Flurry in combo w/ Nat Weapons). UAS is doubly nice, because it benefits from the same Amulet of Mighty Fists/Magic Fang that you will use for the rest of your Natural Attacks, AND if you are getting it from a Monk dip there is signifigant WISDOM synergy. Guided Weapon property on the Amulet really lets you focus on WIS, though that isn´t PFS-legal and really works best when starting at mid-levels, not 1st level (unless you´re a Cleric/Druid).
IMHO, the Shapeshifter variant didn´t go far enough - it should really have given up MORE Ranger abilities, like Favored Enemy for one, and gained REAL Wildshape progression. As is, there is NO scaling in the abilities it gives, just getting to use the same bonuses two at a time and more often... until you reach 20th level, when you actually get something like Wildshape.
Lockjaw a spell or a feat?
I got excited when I saw the Shapeshifter variant expecting/hoping it was something that would allow them to actually tranform their bodies to make use of natural weapons but it was a let-down. He doesn't get to do any real shifting until level 20. :-/
Sunder ISN´T in place of ANY melee attack - it specifically uses the Attack action, so no Iteratives.
(the wording can be confusing because it does use the phrase ´in place of the melee attack´, but that in reference to the Attack Action´s melee attack which it replaces)
I swear, Paizo should send me collectable buttons or something for every time I point this out here ;-PSundering Crit is an option to allow free Sunders on Iteratives/AoO´s/etc.
Nat Weapons probably aren´t optimal for triggering Crit effects, but if you´re using them in combo with a Scimitar/Falchion, it could certainly work decently (though since Nat Weapons also don´t have the highest damage, they are less likely to actually destroy whatever you want to destroy).
I don't like using sunder anyway 'cause breaking basically just gives 'em a -2 atk & dmg if you sunder their weapon. If you destroy the item then you can't use/sell the item.
I'd rather destroy the attacker than the treasure. :)
2nd Level Spell, which both Druids and all spellcasting Rangers get.
Yeah, I think it`s pretty disappointing as well.
There some other stuff in the APG that I think should just have been dropped until a later time when the concept could be done justice. Otherwise, it`s just stuff that probably WILL be re-done at a later point because it IS worthy of a good rendition, but will just end making the APG version mostly irrelevant, like Magus looks to be doing for Eldritch Knight (who only exists to be ´filler` not Prestigious in it`s own right).
2nd Level Spell, which both Druids and all spellcasting Rangers get.
Yeah, I think it`s pretty disappointing as well.
There some other stuff in the APG that I think should just have been dropped until a later time when the concept could be done justice. Otherwise, it`s just stuff that probably WILL be re-done at a later point because it IS worthy of a good rendition, but will just end making the APG version mostly irrelevant, like Magus looks to be doing for Eldritch Knight (who only exists to be ´filler` not Prestigious in it`s own right).
Oh so with lockjaw, he could use it for his bite attack and then still get BOTH claw attacks (so he can Rend) during the grapple.
Just not when Pinning, Grab only initiates a Grapple.
But he could Bite+Grab +Claw/Claw or Weapon Iterative, keeping the target from moving if Grab succeeds.
But you don`t need to be a Shapeshifter Ranger to do that,
you just need a Nat. Weapon and someway to get Lockjaw cast on you.
The SOLUTION to the damage problem at high levels.
If the NWR could get this spell permanent or get a magical item that granted him the effects of the Strong Jaw spell then he wouldn't have to cast it and his damage would be awesome always.
Sunder ISN´T in place of ANY melee attack - it specifically uses the Attack action, so no Iteratives.
(the wording can be confusing because it does use the phrase ´in place of the melee attack´, but that in reference to the Attack Action´s melee attack which it replaces)
I swear, Paizo should send me collectable buttons or something for every time I point this out here ;-PSundering Crit is an option to allow free Sunders on Iteratives/AoO´s/etc.
Nat Weapons probably aren´t optimal for triggering Crit effects, but if you´re using them in combo with a Scimitar/Falchion, it could certainly work decently (though since Nat Weapons also don´t have the highest damage, they are less likely to actually destroy whatever you want to destroy).
I brought this up in another thread. sunder says it's used in place of an attack action. not the but an. the full attack action is an attack action.
in the other thread somone referenced monks being able tondonsunder as part of a full attack, it m,Y have been flurry but I forget the context.
lol - we meet again. I mentioned the monk-sunder business.
I think that the description of sunder is ambivalent; allowing both Quandary's and Mojorat's (and my) interpretation. I just find that the odds and wording favor iterative attacks for sunder as written by 75%. And RAI that iterative attacks are intended to be iterative 100%.
Let me take a shot at this Sundering thing. If I fail, tell my wife I said... "hello."
Well, as it has been quoted numerous times, attempting to sunder must be done "as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack." I don't think there is any ambiguity there - straight out of the Core, an attack action is considered a Standard Action. The keywords in the Sunder description are that it takes place as a part of an attack action, meaning that by extension, attempting to sunder is a standard action as well. After all, you're still just attacking - the target is merely the foe's weapon/armor instead of the foe itself.
Now, moving onto the rules regarding Full Attack actions, under Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack (CRB pg 187), it states that after your first attack, you can choose whether you want to take your remaining attacks, or take a move action instead (provided you haven't already taken it). The key here is that regardless of whether you decide to make those extra attacks or not, the first attack is still considered a standard (attack) action, with sundering merely being a part of it. However, once you make the extra attacks, it becomes a Full-Round (Attack) Action.
So you can Sunder -> Trip -> Attack -> Attack, but you cannot Trip -> Sunder -> Sunder -> Attack.
I am pretty sure the Monk's Flurry of Blows was given the exception for a reason - after all, asides from that ability, he still gets multiple attacks from having a high BAB. Wouldn't it be redundant if Flurrying were identical to having extra attacks from BAB?
TL;DR: Attack Actions are Standard Actions, Full Attack Actions are Full-Round Actions; since Sundering takes place as a part of an Attack Action, it can only be done once per round - as a part of your first attack. It can however, be followed by extra attacks.
ANYHOW, I am off-topic. Is sundering even practical when you're using natural weapons?
uhhh..... no actually the your weapon must have the same plus req of sunder probably prevents it.
uhhh..... no actually the your weapon must have the same plus req of sunder probably prevents it.
So it just comes down to the basic rule that natural weapons can't be enchanted. Shame, it would have been a laugh to take a bite out of someone's +2 longsword with Eldritch Fangs.
uhhh..... no actually the your weapon must have the same plus req of sunder probably prevents it.So it just comes down to the basic rule that natural weapons can't be enchanted. Shame, it would have been a laugh to take a bite out of someone's +2 longsword with Eldritch Fangs.
Natural weapons can be enchanted. Permanent Greater Magic Fang is a prime example. You now have +5 claws or teeth to sunder with.
Thought I'd semi-resurrect this. I was tossing around a few character ideas and came to the Natural Ranger conclusion.
Would it be worth it to just go full Barbarian after the first couple Ranger levels? It'd let me keep full BAB, though I suppose the ability progression would slow down.
You should be taking the claws on your FEET.
Then use melee weapons in your hands when you want.
Half-Orc Natural Attack Ranger:
1xBite @ BAB
+
2xClaws @ BAB
OR
TWF Melee Iterations @ -2 BAB (With TWF)
+
1xBite @ BAB -2 (With Multiattack)
+
2xClaws @ BAB -2 (With Multiattack)
And the Feat that allows +STR on off-hands also works on the Natural Attacks, meaning it is full STR on each hit.
I believe this will remain viable at high levels too. :-p
You should be taking the claws on your FEET.
Then use melee weapons in your hands when you want.
Half-Orc Natural Attack Ranger:
1xBite @ BAB
+
2xClaws @ BABOR
TWF Melee Iterations @ -2 BAB (With TWF)
+
1xBite @ BAB -2 (With Multiattack)
+
2xClaws @ BAB -2 (With Multiattack)And the Feat that allows +STR on off-hands also works on the Natural Attacks, meaning it is full STR on each hit.
I believe this will remain viable at high levels too. :-p
The claws are already full strength as they are primary attacks. Also it would be a talon attack probably on your feet and you do not gain talon attacks. Edit also caltrops will hurt without anything on your feet.
The claws are already full strength as they are primary attacks. Also it would be a talon attack probably on your feet and you do not gain talon attacks. Edit also caltrops will hurt without anything on your feet.
When combined with Weapons all Primary Natural Attacks automatically count as Secondary Natural Attacks, taking -5 to hit and +Half STR.
Talons are for birds and "probably" is not a RAW documentation reference.
By RAW an Eidolon Biped (i.e. human shaped) can take claws on its FEET, so on that I do have some precedent within the RAW body.
In addition, a Summoner at level 10 gets two Evolution points and he can use these to give himself Claws on his Feet should he so desire. - By RAW.
Having Claws does not mean you cannot wear boots. It DOES mean that your feet are under the category "unusual shape and size" so the non-magical boots must be custom tailored but you are not losing a magic item slot.
As a bonus info, you do not even have to be a halforc to get the Bite, you just need the trait "Raised by orcs" and voila, any race can get a Bite attack to go with their foot claws.
I was going for more of a Wolverine/Sabertooth kinda thing, if you know what I am saying. Running around with claws on my feet is more than a little silly. I am sure the intent is for them to be on the hands only, anyway.
I agree though, the natural attack rules are a little vague. They seem to be spread out as well. Makes them a little hard to reference.
I have a different idea if you could take the claws on the feet that opens up a new can of worms of taking natural weapons ranger 2 beast totem barbarian x while raging if they go on the feet I can have them on the feet I can get four claw attacks with the lesser beast totem power and a bite from toothy at level four does that seem balanced. Oh and at 12th level I get pounce while raging so 5 attacks on the charge here I come.
Isn't getting 5 attacks while raging at level 4 a little redicoulous?
Level 6 is really where iterative attacks start picking up ground. Obviously natural attacks would have the advantage before you gain any additional iterative attacks.
So, pretty beast for E6 then, eh? :D
I have a different idea if you could take the claws on the feet that opens up a new can of worms of taking natural weapons ranger 2 beast totem barbarian x while raging if they go on the feet I can have them on the feet I can get four claw attacks with the lesser beast totem power and a bite from toothy at level four does that seem balanced. Oh and at 12th level I get pounce while raging so 5 attacks on the charge here I come.
Isn't getting 5 attacks while raging at level 4 a little redicoulous?
I still think the whole "claws on feet" thing seems too much like some cheese a PC would try to use just to power play. I have a hard time imagining a warrior lashing at his foes with both his sword(s) and toenails. Could be fine for a suitably goofy character, but meh.
I just wish there were a way to bypass DR/Adamantine, Eldritch Claws handles the magic and silver components. Or you could slap on an Amulet of Mighty Fists.
OK, so by your interpretation the claw and natural attacks range from;
"meh"
to;
"not really worth it",
yet the feet-claws have you screaming OP with the same voice? :-)
With feet-claws the builds make sense and are competitive. Without they are crap.
Does make an appealing case doesn't it?
Again: they made an APG natural attack fighter...but it does not offer any access to natural attacks. Are you kidding me?
I'm pretty sure that variant was primarily (only?) for Gms to use on advancing monsters via class levels.
I'm not proposing bullying the GM until he gives up.
I am a great believer in old school roleplaying and rich character backgrounds.
That said, I also take great joy in optimizing my characters. For survival, combat and social situations.
Adding feet claws to a character who is not supremely melee focused can mean an interesting character moves from too gimped to viable, thus increasing the fun and variation around the table.
If I had a player who dumped several stats to 7 while boosting STR to the extreme at the same time as grabbing orc bite and then the claws in addition to a oversized Falcata... Then yes, we'd have a chat. Probably ending with that particular character having to observe stricter rulings on lenient rules readings.
Banning feet claws completely though, would close to door on options that might be fun and "ok" in the lineup of the rest of the characters in the party.
Anyway I felt I needed to add a little reasoning to my ramblings. :-)